1. Basic case
Both Chen and his wife are over 80 years old and live with their son Xiao Chen, daughter-in-law and grandson. Due to the renovation and renewal of the old district in Shanghai, the houses that the whole family lived in were demolished and received demolition compensation. They purchased three houses (one is a house in Huangpu District and two are a house in Pudong New District). Many years later, Xiao Chen died of illness, but the two old men sued their wife and grandson in court.
The plaintiff Chen and his wife believed that the two plaintiffs, Xiao Chen and Chen, were the demolitionees of the original house and should enjoy the demolition compensation benefits of the house equally, on the grounds that they knew only about the house (the house was a disputed house) and the relocation funds in Huangpu District and were unclear about the disposal of the other two resettlement houses, and that the two plaintiffs were the demolition parties of the original house and should enjoy the demolition compensation benefits of the house equally. So they filed a lawsuit with the Huangpu District People's Court, demanding that the two plaintiffs each enjoy the entire property rights of the house at 50% of the share, and the two plaintiffs paid the defendant Chen's wife a discount of 30% of the total value of the house.
Shanghai Li Xiaohua Law Firm accepted the entrustment and appointed a senior lawyer to serve as the litigation agent of Xiao Chen's wife in a dispute over the division of shared house property rights.
The lawyer listened carefully to the client's account and learned that the house where the three generations of the plaintiff and the defendant's grandchildren lived together was demolished. The old and old Chen couple, Xiao Chen and Chen's wife signed the "Shanghai Urban Residence Housing Demolition Compensation and Resettlement Agreement" with the relocation unit, which stipulated that the total compensation for each demolition was more than 1.41 million yuan, and the total price of the three houses purchased was more than 1.68 million yuan, of which the price of the house was more than 1.18 million yuan. The "Confirmation Letter of the Demolition and Resettlement Real Estate Owner and User" states that the owner of the disputed house is Xiao Chen, and he signed the "House Presale Contract", paid the difference price and applied for registration from the trading center. The user is Chen and his wife, and the couple lived there after the house is handed over. One of the two houses in Pudong New District is registered under the name of the grandson of the two plaintiffs, and the other one is registered under the name of the defendant, and both have been sold.
2. Focus of controversy
1. Have the relocation interests of the demolished houses been agreed and divided?
III. Agent strategy
The Huangpu District People's Court held a public hearing for the trial. The attorney reviewed the evidence materials, and put forward major agency opinions based on facts and laws based on the basic case and the focus of the dispute:
The documents related to the demolition of the house were signed by Xiao Chen, the son of the two plaintiffs, who accepted the agency signed by the two plaintiffs. The distribution content of the three demolition and resettlement houses in the "Demolition Agreement" and the "Confirmation Letter" is the true intention of the plaintiffs. The two plaintiffs' entrustment to Xiao Chen is legal and valid.
The owner of the property owner of the disputed house should be Xiao Chen. The two plaintiffs have no right to claim the right to the property in dispute. The confirmation letter not only confirms that the two plaintiffs have the right to use the house in dispute, but also guarantees that the two plaintiffs have a place to live and have a support after the original house is demolished. It also gives the grandsons of the two plaintiffs a house to take care of the interests of the other children of the two plaintiffs. From the seven years after the signing of the above document until Xiao Chen's death, the two plaintiffs never raised any objection to the content of the house allocation in the "Confirmation Letter".
The lawyer believes that the lawsuit request for a shared dispute filed by the two plaintiffs has no factual basis or legal basis. The court is asked to reject the lawsuit request of the two plaintiffs in light of the facts in this case to protect the defendant's legitimate rights and interests.
Fourth, court matters
After trial, the Huangpu District People's Court held that, based on the facts and existing evidence, the three resettlement houses, as the resettlement compensation interests for the original house relocation, have been allocated according to the contents of the "Confirmation Letter" and Xiao Chen actually paid the difference. Among them, although the right holder of the disputed house was determined to be Xiao Chen, it also guaranteed the right to use the house by the two plaintiffs and did not damage the legitimate rights and interests of the two plaintiffs. The Confirmation Letter also confirms that a house in Pudong New Area was obtained by the grandson of the two plaintiffs. In response, the two plaintiffs claimed that they had never divided the houses in dispute and were not aware of the situation of the two resettlement houses in Pudong New Area. The evidence was insufficient and it was difficult for the court to support it. The Huangpu District People's Court ruled: The plaintiff's claim was rejected.
5. Extended thinking
Law is a rigid scale, while family affection is a flexible temperature. In this case, the court made a judgment strictly based on the legal effect of the "Confirmation Letter", maintained the principle of public credibility of property rights registration, and embodied the "spirit of contract" as the cornerstone of a rule of law society. The professional agent of Li Xiaohua Law Firm not only defended the legitimate rights and interests of the client, but also clarified the seven-year family property rights dispute through judicial procedures. It is worth pondering that demolition compensation is originally intended to improve people's livelihood, but due to the lack of sufficient communication, it has evolved into family litigation. When an 80-year-old man goes to court with his daughter-in-law and grandson, we not only see the clear definition of rights and obligations in the legal process, but also hope that family members can transcend material interests and rebuild the bond of trust. Perhaps after the gavel fell, it is necessary to understand and melt the barriers - after all, houses can be divided, but blood and family affection are always the strongest spiritual bond.
6. Legal link
Article 1130 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China The share of inheritance of heirs in the same order shall generally be equal. Heirs who have special difficulties in life and lack the ability to work should be taken care of when allocating their inheritance. Heirs who have fulfilled their main support obligations to the deceased or live with the deceased can be given more points when allocating the inheritance. If an heir with the ability and conditions for support fails to fulfill the obligation to support the inheritance, he shall not be given a share or a small share when allocating the inheritance. The heirs may also agree unequal.
(All the people involved in the case in the article are pseudonyms)